SU as LO alternative – a mockup – Function Requests

Thanks on your suggestion. For me that’s no actual answer as that will break the hyperlink between mannequin and second output/drafting.

I do issues in LO and SU proper now and it fits me. Simply needed to enhance in that workflow and keep away from LO if doable.

The part-way execution of that’s to do what ever drawing, even 2D drawing, in SketchUp earlier than sending it to Structure. For instance, I’d fairly draw door swings in SU and put them on a Layer/Tag that solely exhibits up in plan view than draw them in Structure. If I can maintain my work in LO to only putting a viewport and including notes and dimensions, it’s tolerable.

I strongly agree together with your evaluation / feedback about Trimble and their ‘growth’ of SU/LO over time – as such as you, I’ve held regular making a steady working workflow with SU Professional 2021 and have ended my autorenewal for the subscription this 12 months (subscribed since 2018).

My PrettyPrint extension may give you higher PDF output. It permits you to management line width, shade, and form (spherical or sq. ends and joins) based mostly on the road’s shade in SketchUp.

I developed this to output plumbing plans for big tasks (e.g. a 540 unit residence tower) that Structure simply can’t deal with. Comply with the hyperlink on PrettyPrint’s EW web page to my Wix website for extra data.

Are you able to select totally different line widths for each tag? Or the road width is identical for all the mannequin?

Only for readability – Structure permits line widths to be set by Tag.

I do know, however I used to be asking if the plugin fairly print can do this.

I believed you’ll – that’s why I wrote “only for readability”

Line parameters are set by shade, not tag. I exploit tags to manage visibility of objects.

Dave

This jogs my memory of the times when utilizing AutoCad, (1988 R9) we had to make use of scaled sheets drawn in mannequin area. I had varied scaled sheets for plans vs particulars. All objects had been drawn at 1:1. Some companies would maintain the sheets the identical scale, and would change the objects scale. I might get tasks despatched to me that had been completely complicated. Then AutoCad invented “viewports”, complete sport changer.

I see a number of individuals attempting to unravel the 3D mannequin to 2D doc puzzle. My query is why?
The SketchUp base camps are filled with companies that focus extra on utilizing 3D of their condocs. Clearly some issues like plans, some elevations and such are higher in 2D, however some elevation, sections, and definitely particulars may be higher in 3D.

After I left AutoCad for SketchUp, the best wasn’t to tug the 2D mindset right into a 3D workflow. The aim was to REPLACE a 2D solely workflow with a 3D workflow, solely utilizing 2D when it communicated the intent and data higher or simpler than 3D may.

Condoc instruments could also be a straightforward technique to transition a venture from SketchUp to LayOut, but it surely’s simply as simple to construct and coordinate each SketchUp and LayOut templates to work in tandom utilizing the native instruments in each software program’s. My templates insert, fill out, textual content, and replace robotically. Just a little time and analysis will educate these expertise.

I agree that the structure API as promised on the 2016 basecamp, however later withdrawn was laborious felt by the neighborhood. Perhaps Trimble will bear in mind why so many people left Autocad, and proper course.

Thanks everybody for this dialogue and please know we hear you and are methods to enhance your general expertise inside SU and LO.

You all have given us perception to raised processes and issues to consider shifting ahead.
Trent

Thanks Trent,

Group mentioned and requested LayOut options for years. Open API for LayOut and let neighborhood use it publicy, that may change the sport.

Many have requested for drawing instruments in Structure to be the identical as in Sketchup, with inferencing additionally working the very same method, so it really works for extra individuals with no pointless studying. I’ve completely given up on drawing 2D constructing detailing in Structure, but it surely’s okay. I can do it in sketchup.

I really feel Structure 23 is method higher than 22 although, for simply the higher management over viewports, the place panning is the preliminary software clicking right into a plan view viewport.

An possibility to show off snapping for viewports the place you dont want it/need it will be good for efficiency. It could make stacked viewports with the highest one containing the geometry you truly needed to snap to a breeze to work with.

It could be cool if growth assets weren’t wasted, on issues just like the Ai- pushed choice modes, however fairly put to make use of on issues we really need: Constant and thought by means of workflows for ifc/dwg import/export, higher Structure instruments and efficiency.

I hear OpenGL is being scrapped, that should be plenty of work, and I look ahead to that bringing efficiency positive factors additionally in Structure?

After I left AutoCad for SketchUp, the best wasn’t to tug the 2D mindset right into a 3D workflow. The aim was to REPLACE a 2D solely workflow with a 3D workflow

This can be a nice thought. It’s been hoped for over 20 years now that second turns into a supporting format to 3d, however typically it’s nonetheless the opposite method round.
We now firmly mannequin in 3d area, however the main plans we ship as professionals are nonetheless the second plans/elevations/sections.
The concept of utilizing a IFC or BIM change format for digital 3d fashions is bettering however has been painfully sluggish to progress into each day workflows in most industries.

The factor I attempt to purpose for outputs for are Isometric views and, if doable, Cutaway views.
Sadly it takes fairly a little bit of psychological gymnastics to supply cutaway technical drawings. We’re speaking a number of part planes, changes to part fills and minimize traces, handbook hatches, resolving conflicts between touching faces, hybrid rendering fashion, assigning dimensions…
What ought to be a very nice and easy software for SU+LO output is definitely technically difficult to perform.

EG That is only a tough draft I’ve open on my display screen in the intervening time…the method for turning it right into a dimensioned technical drawing goes to be a bit time consuming for me.

Let’s have a look with Curic Sing-line Textual content in beta stage, very promissing for this concept.
The beta model can obtain “free” right here, require license of Curic Studio 1.1:
Curic Single-Line Textual content (Beta) (gumroad.com)